Midweek Review

‘NICE RACISM’

Published

5 years ago

2021/11/10

Sahan Weerasooriya

‘NICE RACISM’ by Robin DiAngelo, 2021

By Charles Ponnuthurai Sarvan

What follows is not a review of this book but, rather, a sharing of some thoughts that arose from reading it: DiAngelo is white and her focus is on the United States. Besides, the so-called ‘race problem’ in the USA, and in some other countries, translates into one of skin colour: In an article, ‘The term racism and discourse’, I suggested, tongue in cheek, that this kind of racism more accurately be termed ‘colourism’. The phrase ‘nice racism’ appears to be an oxymoron because racism can never be nice. On the contrary, racism is nasty, and inflicts great pain and suffering on its victims. To the shame of our species, there’s no dearth of examples of racism, and of the cruelty it unleashes: the instances are as many as they are horrible.

Racism has been present in all ages and in all parts of the world. To cite just one example at random, here’s Tom Fletcher in ‘Prospect Magazine’, July 23, 2018. I’m sorry, I don’t know in which country and when: “What kind of hatred could make a man stab a baby crying out for his mother’s milk? And for the mother to witness this murder while she is being gang-raped by security forces?” I recall a student objecting to the word “inhumane”, arguing it implied the opposite, namely, that humans are generally humane. One of the most horrific and distressing accounts of cruelty I have read is by Bartolome De Las Casas, 1484-1576, a Spanish monk. The work is translated into English as ‘A Short History Of The Destruction Of The Indies’ and is available in the Penguin Classics series.

As I pointed out in the article alluded to above, there’s no race but racism flourishes. There are no scientific grounds for believing in race. Race is a human construct or, if one prefers, there’s only one race: The human race. Admittedly, thinking on the lines of the human species can lead to another avatar of racism known as ‘speciesism’, and to the cruel exploitation of all other species. As Genesis 1: 26 of the Bible expresses it, we “have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” We have used this dominion to the detriment of other species and, finally, to ourselves. It must be acknowledged that some so-called ‘primitive’ folk did not think of domination but of living in cooperation and harmony with nature and all other beings. Darwin showed us that, rather than being separate and superior to nature, we are very much a part of it. Consequently, if we damage nature, we injure ourselves.

Shlomo Sand, Professor of History at Tel Aviv University, wrote a book titled ‘The Invention Of The Jewish People’. The term ‘invention’ conveys his main contention. “It is as if a Sinhalese professor, teaching at a Sri Lankan university, were to write a book – not in English but in Sinhala – which questioned the fundamental assumptions of Sinhalese-Buddhist nationalism”: (Sarvan, ‘Groundviews’, Colombo, 07, March 2013). In what immediately follows, I draw from this article. Sand argues that there is no biological basis for Jewishness, and that belief in a Jewish race is nothing but “racist pseudoscience” (page 257). No Jewish gene has been found. The UNESCO document, ‘The Race Concept’, completely rejects any connection between biology and national culture. Race is a social myth and not a scientific fact, but “Zionist pedagogy produced generations […] who believed wholeheartedly in the ethnic uniqueness of their nation” (page 273).” ‘Jew’ referred to a religious affiliation, and not to an ethnic, group. (Somewhat similarly, “Arya” meant “noble” and did not refer to all Sinhalese. Tamil kings described themselves as “Arya”: See Professor R.A.L.H. Gunawardana’s article in ‘Sri Lanka: History And The Roots Of Conflict’, edited by Jonathan Spencer.) Ta-Nehisi Coates in his ‘Between The World And Me’, states that race is not the father of racism but its child. To express it differently, it’s those who think on lines of race who create, believe in and practice racism.

It has been said that while a patriot loves her or his own, a nationalist hates all others. (Racists almost invariably describe themselves as nationalists.) While religious doctrine is of a divine or semi-divine origin, religion being a human construct, can be co-opted in the service of racism. Yet another book by Professor Sand, ‘How I Stopped Being A Jew’, repeats the now familiar claim that it is we, human beings, who created God or the gods. If so, ethnoreligious nationalism is not surprising. Religion, contrary to religious doctrine, can serve to sanctify discrimination and even cruelty. Perhaps, Sand’s title should have been ‘Why I stopped being a Jew’. I quote from pages 26 to 27: “My own place is among those who try to discern and root out, or at least reduce, the excessive injustices of the here and now. The persecuted and victimized of yesterday seem to me less a matter of priority than the persecuted of today or the victimized of tomorrow.”

Digressing to thoughts on identity, Bernard-Henri Levy, incidentally, also of Jewish ethnicity, writes in ‘The New Statesman’ (22-28 October 2021, page 36): “You are a free woman or man if you rebel against your identity, not if you are cocooned in your identity.” Our legal name signals a single and singular identity, but in reality our identity is not simple but multiple. Among the many aspects of his identity that Professor Amartya Sen, Nobel-Prize winner, lists in his book, ‘Identity And Violence: The Illusion Of Destiny’ are: Asian, Bengali, an American and British resident, an economist, a believer in secularism and democracy, a feminist, a heterosexual, a defender of gay and lesbian rights and a non-believer in an after-life, as in an earlier life or lives. It follows that if, for example, someone says, “He’s a Sinhalese” or “He’s a Tamil” then the speaker has chosen to prioritise one element out of a multi-faceted identity. It may tell us more about the speaker than the person spoken about. Flannery O’Connor has a short story titled ‘The Artificial Nigger’. (The word ‘artificial’ indicates that the concept of ‘Nigger’ is not natural but a human creation. In a train, a white grandfather asks his little grandson, Nelson, who was the man who just walked down. The innocent boy, and innocence can mean ignorance, answers that it was a man, but the grandfather is not satisfied. Nelson then offers other answers such as an old man, a fat man until the grandfather triumphantly ‘educates’ him: That was a nigger. It’s the only feature that matters to the old man. Often, those infected with racism infect others. Children are not born racist.

Professor Sen admits that a sense of group-identity can strengthen and warm our relations within the collective – even as it leads to exclusion which, in turn, can result in the mal-treatment of the ‘Other’. Indeed, this sense of belonging can be so strong that the group seems to be an extension of one’s own self. Perhaps, we could here turn to Erich Fromm’s ‘Escape From Freedom’. Reinhold Niebuhr in his ‘Moral Man And Immoral Society’ argues that when we are in a group, ‘other-than-self’ attributes are vitiated, if not entirely destroyed. There is then little reason to guide our conduct, less check on our impulses; less capacity for transcending our individual self. Accepting generalisations (and myths) which, though an oversimplification, are very potent, our behaviour as a group is often a shame to our morality as individuals. In other words, as members of a group, we are ready to act in ways in which we, as individuals, would not.

Returning to DiAngelo, leaving aside a racism that is overt and proud, she concerns herself with more subtle forms of the disease, unrecognized or unacknowledged by the infected. When ‘nice racists’ are confronted with evidence of racism in them, rather than pause and undertake self-scrutiny, they react with denial and dismissal; with hurt and indignation, even with anger. We do not like to think badly of ourselves: It damages our self-image. A frequent proof adduced by ‘nice racists’ is: “I have friends from the under privileged group. Therefore, I am not a racist.” But proximity, superficial contact, even social interaction, don’t mean, ipso facto, freedom from prejudice. Going back in time to London and the 1960s I, as a young man, was friendly with a middle-aged English couple. One day, I asked them whether they ever came to the West End and received the emphatic reply: “Oh no. There are far too many foreigners there.” Having become a friend, I had also become an individual, and was no longer seen and reacted to as one of their foreign (coloured) group. Consciously or unconsciously, the racial minded make exceptions of certain individuals known to them, and so keep their group prejudice intact.

DiAngelo argues that racism more than being personal and of the individual is a system. Racism being a system, members of the dominant group profit from it in several aspects of their daily lives. To believe there’s no racism in them leads ‘nice racists’ to think they are outside the problem; have nothing to do with it and, therefore, need do nothing about it. The cognitive psychologist, Steven Pinker, in his book ‘Rationality’, takes up the argument that even reason, truth and objectivity are social constructs that justify the privilege of dominant groups. The ringing, and often cited, assertion of the American Declaration of Independence that all are equal was signed by men holding a pen in one hand while with the other hand they brandished a whip over their cowering slaves. We human beings have a remarkable ability to live with contradictions, and so lofty words can go with sordid practice; pious religiosity accompany, even justify, cruelty.

During the years I taught at the University of Zambia, the exile headquarters of the ANC was in Lusaka, and I knew several of their cadres. I noticed that then, as used by them, the phrase ‘a liberal’ meant a person who was aware of the cruel injustice of apartheid, were sympathetic but did nothing at all to help combat it. So it is elsewhere. ‘Liberal’ was a reproachful, regretful, term. It certainly wasn’t a compliment: Adapting words from T. S. Eliot, “After such knowledge, what forgiveness?” As Martin Luther King wrote from prison, more than the words of those who hate us, what hurts us most is the silence of our friends. And as Archbishop Desmond Tutu wrote, if in a situation of oppression you remain silent then, in effect, you have sided with the oppressors.

But we are creatures of our place and time, and often are unaware of our own contradictions and failures. Marcus Aurelius is far better known as a Stoic philosopher (there are significant similarities between Buddhist doctrine and Stoicism) and as the author of the world famous and perennial ‘Meditations’ (written for himself, and not meant for publication) than as a Roman emperor. The words of Marcus Aurelius have been of great help to me and, to adopt what Ben Jonson wrote of Shakespeare, I honour his memory on this side of idolatry as much as any. With Aurelius, it was not a case of high living and commonplace thinking but of simple living and lofty thought. He was strict on himself while being tolerant of the failures and failings of others. He constantly monitored his thoughts, words and actions to see if they accorded with his notions of justice and morality. When told by his physicians that death was near, rather than desperately and futilely trying to prolong the inevitable, the Emperor thereafter declined food and drink so as to sooner free himself from existence. He died true and faithful to his beliefs. Noli timere. Yet being a man of his times, this ‘philosopher emperor’ did his best to preserve and extend the Roman Empire. To express it bluntly, building or maintaining an empire meant attacking other lands and peoples; taking away by force from those less able to defend themselves. It involved killing and destruction, occupation and exploitation, all for the glory and benefit of Rome. Rather than stay in the comfort and safety of Rome, Marcus Aurelius went with his troops and camped with them. Pax Romana was a ‘peace’ enforced by brutal military might. Despite noble protestations and pretensions, empires go against morality; against humanity and justice. It seems to me that, doing his duty as a Roman emperor, Marcus Aurelius betrayed his Stoic principles and ideals.

DiAngelo addresses those who complacently assume they are free of racism. She urges a more honest and rigorous self-examination; a moving away from the easy and ‘easing’ assumption that we have cleansed ourselves of all taint of racism.

All News Advertisement

Midweek Review

Overall SLPP failures stressed in new Aragalaya narrative

Published

4 days ago

2026/05/20

Sahan Weerasooriya

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa receives a copy of Mohan Samaranayake's ‘Regime Change project 2022’ at its launch held at Sri Lanka Foundation recently.

The US has been complicit in the 9 July 2022 assault on the President’s House. A new book, on the regime change project, by renowned political commentator Mohan Samaranayake, examined the then US Ambassador Julie Chung’s role in the operation. Referring to her twitter messages before the final assault, the author pointed out how she warned the government and the military against the advance on the President’s House while reassuring protection for the attacking party.

Throughout the March 31-July 14, 2022 period, Chung blatantly intervened in the government’s response, thereby preventing tangible action being taken to neutralise the growing threat.

Bringing up claims regarding Chung/ Indian High Commissioner Gopal Baglay putting pressure on Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to accept the presidency, Samaranayake declared that only Abeywardena could clear the continuing controversy regarding the intervention made by an envoy. Regardless of who visited the Speaker, at his official residenc, as the JVP-led crowds prepared to bring Parliament under their control on 13 May, 2022, what we should keep in mind is that it was a joint US-Indian project. Who definitely met the then Speaker, followed by a delegation consisting of Buddhist and Catholic clergy and civil society, who, too, echoed the foreign instigated agenda, is irrelevant.

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Political and foreign affairs commentator Mohan Samaranayake meticulously deals with the overthrowing of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa in 2022, in a manner that exposed the failure on the part of the then ruling party, the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), to recognise the US-Indian plot that was in the making no sooner he assumed office as the President, or even before that. Samaranayake also discusses the pathetic police and armed forces response to the threat (Chapter 7).

Samaranayake dealt with the possibility of at least a section of the Cabinet-of-Ministers, unwittingly contributing to the overall strategy meant to undercut the government and isolate the President.

‘Regime Change project 2022’, authored by one-time UN public communications staffer, at its Colombo office, who also held several government appointments over a period of time, including under Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s tenure, found fault with Ministers Dullas Alahaperuma and Udaya Gammanpila, leader of the SLPP constituent, Pivithuru Hela Urumaya.

Samaranayake shed light on a frightening situation, within the ruling party, that lacked at least a basic plan of action, struggling to cope up with internal strife. He singled out the Basil Rajapaksa-led group as the worst of the offenders. Samaranayake is spot on. The author quite rightly declared that the triumph of the regime change project was nothing but the disintegration of the nationalistic group, within the ruling bloc. Unfortunately, the SLPP seemed to have failed to realise the gravity of that situation.

Pointing out that President Gotabaya Rajapaksa hadn’t been the leader of the ruling party, in one line, the author emphasised how the authoritarian conduct of the Basil Rajapaksa–led section of the parliamentary group caused rapid deterioration. The SLPP secured a near 2/3 majority at the 2020 parliamentary election. Formed in 2016, the SLPP, having won 18 electoral districts, bagged 145 seats. Basil Rajapaksa’s group didn’t tolerate dissent. That group slammed Wimal Weerawansa when he urged the SLFP to create an influential position for President Gotabaya Rajapaksa who ended up sacking Weerawansa and Gammanpila for some other mattter. The author criticised the President’s action.

It would be interesting to ascertain how the conspirators exploited the discord, within the ruling party, as they advanced the anti-Gotabaya strategy. Samaranayake, like others who authored books on overthrowing President Rajapaksa, acknowledged that the economic fallout, caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, and the war in Ukraine, facilitated the operation.

The leader of Jathika Nidahas Peramuna, Wimal Weerawansa, was the first to release a book on the regime change project. “Nine: The Hidden Story,’’ launched in April 2023, caused quite a controversy over claims of direct US intervention. Then US Ambassador Julie Chung denied Weerawansa’s revelation that she asked Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena to take over the presidency, regardless of constitutional impediments. Later the then Speaker’s indirect admission of what transpired proved much of Weerawansa’s assertions, though there is till controversy over the identity of the envoy who visited the Speaker at his official residence on 13 July, 2022. Remember the old adage that ambassadors are there to lie abroad for their country.

Weerawansa was followed by the much-respected writer, Sena Thoradeniya (Galle Face Protest: Systems Change or Anarchy), ousted President Gotabaya Rajapaksa (The Conspiracy to Oust Me from the Presidency), Maj. Gen. K. B. Egodawela who served on President Rajapaksa’s staff (Aragalaya: From Love to Violence), President Ranil Wickremesinghe’s media chief Prof. Sunanada Madduma Bandara (Aragalaye Balaya), Treasury Secretary Mahinda Siriwardana (Sri Lanka’s Economic Revival – Reflection on the Journey from Crisis to Recovery), and expert current affairs commentator Asanga Abeygunasekera (Winds of Change).

However, Samaranayake obviously has paid extra attention to the SLPP’s inner shortcomings that contributed to the overall success of the regime change operation. At the tail end of the first chapter, Samaranayake raised a spate of questions regarding the terrifying possibility of inside help that enabled the conspirators to carry out the regime change operation. Samaranayake asked whether those within the government caused economic deterioration deliberately, in support of the move against the President.

Referring to economic indicators and comparing the official figures, the author stressed the deterioration of the national economy during the Yahapalana administration (2015 to 2019) contributed to the economic collapse, like borrowing as much as USD12 billion by Wickremesinghe’s regime at high interests, however all that was conveniently put on President Gotabaya Rajapaksa by convenient critics leaving out elements of truth disadvantageous to their agenda. Propagation of false and politically motivated narratives, according to Samaranayake, seemed to have overwhelmed the President and his sharply divided parliamentary group.

On the basis of a disclosure made by the ex-President, Samaranayake highlighted how a far reaching decision to unilaterally suspend debt repayment was taken even without consulting the President.

Swiss Embassy affair

Samaranayake, who served as the Director General of President Gotabaya Rajapaksas’s Media Division, examined the regime change operation, taking into consideration what was dubbed as the Swiss Embassy affair, at the onset of his administration. Having acknowledged President Rajapaksa thwarted a diabolical Swiss plot to tarnish his government, using local Embassy employee Ganiya Bannister Francis (Siriyalatha Perera is her original name/She now lives abroad) from discrediting Sri Lanka, the author asserted that the SLPP’s failure to take the then Swiss Ambassador Hanspeter Mock to task for false flag operation influenced those who planned the regime change to go ahead.

The SLPP should reexamine its response to the Swiss Embassy affair. Perhaps, Sri Lanka should revisit the incident, particularly against the backdrop of accusations that Hanspeter Mock pursued an utterly contemptible agenda targeting Sri Lanka. Among the incidents cited was the Ambassador facilitating Chief Inspector Nishantha de Silva of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) leaving the country without government authorisation.

Samaranayake’s assertion that the 2022 colour revolution was an extension of the 2015 regime change operation seems controversial to some people, though the writer believes the first such project was mounted in the aftermath of Sri Lanka’s triumph over the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The US backed UNP-JVP-TNA project to field war-winning Army Commander Sarath Fonseka as the common presidential candidate against incumbent Mahinda Rajapaksa that exposed the US hand. There cannot be any dispute over that.

The seriousness of Samaranayake’s allegation that ex-parliamentarian Hirunika Premachandra (SJB), on behalf of the regime change operation, tested President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s defences during protest conducted outside the President’s private residence at Pangiriwatta, Mirihana, on 5 March, 2022. The issue at hand is whether the SJB authorised Hirunika’s actions at Pangiriwatta. But, Samaranayake’s criticism of the President and the armed forces, as well as the intelligence services, for failing to take tangible measures against the growing and deepening regime change threat. The author went to the extent of describing them as ,silent onlookers. The accusation that the President refused to believe that he was the target of the regime change operation underscored the SLPP’s pathetic response to the threat.

Samaranayake painted a bleak picture of the situation by quoting Egodawela, who served the Army, like Gotabaya, as having asserted that the March 31, 2022 violent protest was meant to assassinate President Rajapaksa. In post-Aragalaya examination of events/developments, Samaranayake blamed the police and armed forces for not neutralising gangs that unleashed violence in the aftermath of the attack on the Galle Face protesters, on 9 May, 2022. But, unfortunately, Samaranayake failed to pay sufficient attention to the failure on the part of the police and the armed forces to prevent Temple Trees mounting the first attack. There is no doubt that Temple Trees ordered the attack in a desperate bid to break the siege on the Presidential Secretariat, contrary to the instructions issued by President Gotabaya.

Samaranayake, who studied the situation, leading to the overthrowing of President Gotabaya, March 31 to July 14, 2022, period, and subsequent developments for nearly two years, emphasised the alleged bid to kill the President, and several others, and display their bodies on 9 July, 2022, following the storming of the President’s House. Based on social media posts, the author made the shocking claim that a private local and a foreign television channel had been there to telecast the displaying of bodies.

Perhaps, the plot could have succeeded if not for the timely intervention made by the then Navy Commander, Vice Admiral Nishantha Ulugettenne, who deployed SLNS Gajabahu to move the President and First Lady Anoma, who received the appreciation of all for being humble.

Ranil’s role and Yahapalana fault

Wickremesinghe played a crucial role in the project to oust President Rajapaksa. That is the undeniable truth. Beleaguered Gotabaya’s decision to accommodate Wickremesinghe as the Prime Minister, in April 2022, and then elevate him as the President, wouldn’t change the ugly truth. The author didn’t mince his words when he explained the swift collapse of the externally backed operation, soon after Gotabaya’s ouster. Those who funded the regime change project, lawyers/BASL involved in it and men and women who pursued political and religious agendas, according to the author, felt satisfied when Gotabaya stepped down. “They knew when to halt the campaign,” declared Samaranayake whose criticism of the President and the SLPP should attract their attention.

Samaranayake asserted that Wickremesinghe’s readiness to swiftly deploy the military and police to chase away those who remained outside the Presidential Secretariat, and other places, too, after Gotabaya’s ouster, contributed to the normalisation of the situation.

Having provided muscle to the protest campaign at the beginning, the UNP and the SJB cannot, under any circumstances, absolve themselves of the responsibility for the violence unleashed by organised gangs. Samaranayake’s clear stand that such violence cannot be justified, on the basis of Temple Trees allowing some staunch supporters to attack the Galle Face protesters out of sheer desperation, should be commended. SJB leader Sajith Premadasa, who sought political mileage out of the rapidly developing situation on 9 May, 2022, following the attack on the Galle Face protesters, was nearly killed when he visited the protest site. If not for the quick response of his bodyguards, Aragalaya activists could have captured him and other SJB lawmakers. Had that happened, the result could have been catastrophic.

One of the most controversial claims made by the author was the Chinese involvement in the regime change project. Although allegations and claims pertaining to the US, European and Indian interventions are in the public domain, the alleged direct Chinese involvement is a matter of grave concern. The author, without hesitation, named China and Russia in a group that included the US, the UK, EU, Japan and India hell-bent on achieving their political, economic and military objectives at the expense of other countries. Citing Sri Lanka as a case in point, the author methodically discussed post-Second WW regime change operations elsewhere while paying attention to the US-China conflict that undermined Sri Lanka’s sovereignty.

Samaranayake mentioned the US backing for retired General Sarath Fonseka at the 2010 presidential election, less than a year after the eradication of the LTTE as an instance that proved the US determination to achieve its objectives at any cost. Had the author been aware Fonseka was categorised alongside the Rajapaksa brothers as war criminals. It is like the way US treats ISIS as good terrorists and bad terrorist depending on whom they back. WikiLeaks released the then US Ambassador Patricia Butenis’s classified missive to Washington in addition to a spate of other documents which revealed directed US involvement in selecting Fonseka as the common candidate.

Samaranayake squarely differed with those who build their narratives on the basis of the actions of the then US Ambassador Julie Chung (2022 to January 2026) and Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland (2021 to 2024). Samaranayake is quite right in his assessment that, like many other US officials, the likes of Chung and Nuland were only tools to achieve overall US objectives. In the case of hapless Sri Lanka, the US strategy was/ is meant to ensure that Colombo remained aligned with the Indo-Pacific doctrine regardless of political changes. The way the US and its partner in crime India embraced and propped up JVP/NPP and again reiterated their approach.

An Act like no other

Samaranayake didn’t even bother to mention Siriwardena’s book that dealt with the developments, essentially with focus on economics leading to President Gotabaya’s ouster. Similarly, there hadn’t been a reference to ‘Winds of Change.’ (https://island.lk/aragalaya-gr-blames-cia-in-asanga-abeyagoonasekeras-explosive-narrative/)

Let me briefly discuss a major difference between Samaranayake’s take on economic crisis and that of Siriwardena who confidently asserted that Gotabaya’s presidency could have been saved if the government secured IMF loan facility. ( https://island.lk/aragalaya-could-have-been-thwarted-and-grs-presidency-saved-mahinda-siriwardana/)

According to Samaranayake’s narrative, the sudden suspension of debt repayment scheme even without consulting President Gotabaya had been a calculated move to entrap Sri Lanka in IMF strategy.

It would be pertinent to mention that President Wickremesinghe, in July, 2024, managed to adopt the Economic Transformation Act without a vote, in line with the overall IMF/other lending agencies’ strategy to ensure Sri Lanka remained aligned with the IMF, regardless of political changes. Having opposed the IMF outwardly over the years, the JVP/NPP pledged its allegiance to the IMF, without any hesitation, once installed in power at the expense of its purported original principles. There had never been such an Act that forbade political parties of pursuing policies contrary to specific IMF dictates.

Samaranayake explained how the JVP/NPP completely changed its approach in the wake of the 2024 national elections. Anura Kumara Dissanayake, who, in his capacity as the leader of the JVP, as well as its parliamentary group, in 2015 October, lashed out in Parliament against unbridled activities of India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) in Jaffna. In April 2025 President Dissanayake entered into seven vital MoUs with Premier Modi. One dealt with defence, and a few months later Sri Lanka allowed Japan to sell controlling interests in the strategic ship builder Colombo Dockyard Limited (CDL), once carefully nursed by late National Security Minister Lalith Athulathmudali who was assassinated by the LTTE, to Mazagon Dock Shipbuilders Limited (MDL) affiliated with the Indian Ministry of Defence.

The way Sri Lanka succumbed to Western powers and India and ended up in their domain, therefore, as Samaranayake predicted, there may never be a comprehensive investigation into the despicable regime change operation. Alleging that Wickremesinghe conveniently allowed those responsible at all levels, including the military and police to go scot-free, the author asserted that Dissanayake, a key beneficiary of that operation, too, may never intervene.

Premier Modi, who sort of gave his blessings to the despicable decapitating operation against Iran, by visiting Tel Aviv, should realise that he is no darling of the West and he, too, will be stabbed in the back as these evil pale faces have done to others if they suspect that his country might be a future threat, both militarily and economically, to them. The US denied visa to Modi in March 2005. The State Department acted in terms of the Immigration and Nationality Act, citing Modi’s alleged responsibility for “particularly severe violations of religious freedom” related to the 2002 Gujarat violence.

Referring to various uprisings and revolutions that shaped the world over the past several centuries and those who propagated lies as they advanced frightening strategy here, the author confidently asserted that the vast majority didn’t realise that they were being used in a high profile regime change project.

Samaranayake’s narrative is a must read, as it is a no holds barred examination of available facts, sometimes ignored by political parties, the judiciary and the media. Having read all books that dealt with regime change projects, except the one by Maj. Gen. Egodawella, the writer is of the view that Samaranayake went to extraordinary lengths to educate the people of the challenges faced by post-war Sri Lanka.

The challenge to the country’s unitary status seems to be growing in the absence of a cohesive strategy regardless of political interests to safeguard national interests. The situation seems so bad and further deteriorating rapidly, the 17tth anniversary of armed forces triumph over separatist Tamil terrorism appears to be irrelevant. Let us hope Samaranayake’s thought-provoking narrative receives public attention and influences the decision-makers to change their direction.

In fact, there had never been such a comprehensive examination of regime change operation, taking into consideration a wide-range of facts/issues to prove the US dominance here, though China still runs many critically important projects. Unassuming Samaranayake, like Thoradeniya, remain among a small group of people who had the strength and courage to tell the truth.

Midweek Review

Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka – part iii

Published

4 days ago

2026/05/20

Sahan Weerasooriya

Sirancee Gunawardena, the author of ‘Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka ‘(1977) met J. Pannila of Artigala south, Hanwella when she was researching palm leaf manuscripts. He was then a village elder and was the descendant of a long line of palm leaf manuscript writers.

Pannila had told Sirancee how the palm leaf is prepared as writing material and she has reproduced the information in her book. It is possible to infer from the knowledge shown by Pannila that palm leaf manuscripts writers were also trained in preparing the palm leaf, and in preserving the manuscript as well as writing on it. I think there may have been others who lacked the skill of writing, but who knew to prepare the item and to preserve it.

In Sri Lanka palm leaf manuscripts were made out of the young fronds of the Talipot palm. Talipot was able to resist the tropical climate of Sri Lanka. Pannila said, before the leaf bud opens, rings of bamboo are put 18 inches apart round the main leaf (sic). After 21 days, the branch is cut and brought down carefully, from the crown of the tree which is usually about 60 feet above ground. The mid rib of each leaf is cut off and the leaves become flexible strips.

The leaves are wound up into rolls. These are put into a large clay pot, with layers of pineapple leaves in between. Pot is filled with water and Kappetiya branches are placed on top, the vessels is sealed with a cloth and heated over a fire. The palm leaves were considered sufficiently boiled when the leaves of the Kappetiya fell off. The rolls were then taken out and washed.

The leaves were polished by rubbing them against a rounded pole of Walla wood, till the strips became flat. They were hung on a coir rope, like a clothes line, and kept outdoors for a week or so, get a fine polished texture. They were now ready for writing. The leaf strip was placed on a piece of soft wood and held in the left hand for writing with the right hand.

Writing was done with the Panhinda. This stylus had a steel tipped quill. The end of the quill was like that of an arrow, both sides were sharp and the edge was pointed to obtain sharp outlines. There were different sized quills. Some broader than others. Sharp, small size stylus was used for drawings. Sirancee owned two stylus, one long stylus with an ornate fan shaped top and another with two decorative metal globules.

The ordinary stylus was traditionally hand made by the village blacksmith. But there were elaborate ones with ornate gold, metal, ivory or carved wooden handles. The gold stylus was made of pure gold except for the stylus which was of steel. The gold stylus was a symbol of prestige. The Ananda Coomaraswamy collection has a golden stylus with royal ensign ‘SrI’. It is said to have been originally given by King Narendrasinha to Alagaboda Nilame.

The stylus was treated with respect. Sirancee pointed out that the Maha Lekammitiya and stylus were carried in the Dalada temple procession in the Esala perahera. The Matale Mahadivase Kadainmpota said “Niharepola Alahakoon Mohottala was appointed lekam of Tunkorale and received the ran Panhinda and flag”.

Inscribing a palm leaf was a skilled task. A scribe had to go through a long period of training before he was allowed to write on ola. Only very experienced writers were allowed to inscribe a major work. The handwriting in a manuscript therefore was very beautiful and were works of art, said Sirancee. Letters were uniform and evenly spaced. Palm leaf drawings were fine line drawings, which required great skill. Circles and shapes were drawn free hand.

The manuscript usually starts with the auspicious word ‘Svasti’, with the latter ‘ka’ below it. The text commenced with traditional salute to the Buddha and ended with a colophon which gave the name of the author and promoter and some times the scribe and the date. But most authors were anonymous.

Palm leaf manuscripts were numbered starting from the Sinhala letter Ka according to the Sinhala alphabet. words were written from left to right. There are no punctuation marks and no spaces between words. There were margins and a symbol to demarcate paragraphs. Most manuscripts only had text, but there were many with illustrations.

The words scratched on the ola had to be made visible. Inking was a special art. The process was called Kalumadima. The palm leaf was rubbed with a soft cloth dipped in Dummala oil and powdered charcoal obtained from the Godama tree. The surface of the leaf was then cleaned with rice bran (Dahaiyya).

The dummala used was a resin derived from a fossilised root of a plant called Hal ((vateria acuminata). It was dug out from paddy fields and river beds, on the two auspicious days, Wednesdays and Saturday. The dummala was distilled in an earthen pot with the outside coated in cow dung and clay. The distilling was done between 6 pm and 2 am in the garden. Ten pounds of Dummala produced about 2 bottles of oil.

When palm leaves were gathered together to form a single text, they resembled books. The manuscripts seen by Sirancee averaged 60-65 folios, but there were many which were larger. One manuscript had 311 folios.

Creating this ‘book’ was also a special process. The leaves were cut into the required size, usually two inches wide and between 8 and 18 inches in length. The inscribed leaves were placed one under the other. Holes were punched with a hot rod, and a cord passed through. The punching of holes was done according to rules given as verse. Fold the leaf into three then into four and make the holes in between the creases at the two ends. One manuscript seen by Sirancee was stitched together and opened like an accordion.

Folios were placed between two covers known as Kamba. Most manuscripts had wooden covers, of ebony, jak, milla, calamander and other hard woods. The covers were decorated in lac with flower designs, such as Jasmin, kadupul, lotus, liya wela,creepers,. Some were decorated with geometric designs, or rope design. Some had ivory inlay, others had contrasting wood in marquetry, tortoise shell was also used. One manuscript had ebony cover inlaid with ivory. the button was of tortoise shell. At Katarangala in Halloluwa they found a pirit pota with covers in dainty design.

Highly venerated manuscripts such as those on Buddhism had covers of ivory or silver, and were decorated with gem stones. These are kept safely. Malwatte temple had a palm leaf manuscript on Abhidamma written in Sinhala, with ivory covers, a border of rubies and blue sapphires and a design of flowers set in gold. Malwatte had another manuscript, with cover in silver and gold and a floral design richly encrusted with white sapphires and zircons. Hanguranketa temple had a manuscript with gem studded covers. Pelmadulla Raja maha vihara also had a manuscript with carved ivory cover. Several other manuscripts had gem studded covers. National Museum library had a manuscript on Abhidamma with an ornamented cover in brass. SWRD Bandaranaike collection had a manuscript with silver cover and gems.

The formula for making oil for preserving manuscripts is a heavily guarded secret, said Sirancee. Pannila had a secret formula which was handed down generation to generation and was known only to a few families. Pannila gave Sirancee the formula in appreciation of her interest in the subject. Sirancee has gven the formula and method, with photographs, in her book on pages 38-40.

Pannila had been commissioned by the National Museum library to apply his secret oil to the palm leaf manuscripts which needed preserving. He was also invited to temple libraries and to the Institute of Indigenous medicine at Rajagiriya to clean and restore their manuscripts.

Sirancee stated that palm leaf manuscripts stored on wooden shelves did not deteriorate despite the humid climate. Manuscripts kept in pettagama tended to disintegrate, she said. But Nagolle Raja Maha vihara was a well-known exception. The olas stored in its pettagama remain well preserved.

The National Library of Sri Lanka has a Preservation and Conservation Centre (PAC) which pays special attention to palm leaf manuscripts. The IFLA PAC Centre was inaugurated on 5^th August 2015. The Centre produces “Panhida Herbal Oil”for the conservation of palm leaf manuscripts.

Udaya Cabral, who heads the PAC, with M Ravikumar, and T Ramanan presented a paper titled Developing a strategic program for safeguarding palm-leaf manuscripts in Sri Lanka at IFLA Conference, 2018.In 2021 the National Library issued a report on best practices for the conservation of Palm-Leaf Manuscripts, prepared by Udaya Cabral and R.M Nadeeka Rathnabahu.

Cabraal and Ratnabahu said that a palm leaf manuscript around 200 years old located in National Library of Sri Lanka, regularly treated by Dummala herbal oil was examined under microscope. They found that the traditional oil was not completely effective, some fungus still remained. PAC recommended that after treatment with Dummala oil, the manuscripts be kept in a specially designed ‘fume cupboard ‘made out of neem wood, with a cube of Thymol placed at the bottom.

In my view, it is only in recent times, that ola manuscripts are treated as archival material, to be preserved somehow. My guess is that in ancient times, the original manuscript was kept as long as possible but a copy was made when it was clear that the original was going to perish. This was repeated over and over again. That is how the Mahavamsa came to us. ( continued)

REFERENCES

Sirancee Gunawardana Palm leaf manuscripts of Sri Lanka. 1977 p 14–, 33-. 132, 134, 248-251, 254, 25

https://www.ifla.org/news/pac-sri-lanka-publishes-a-new-report-on-best-practices-for-the-conservation-of-palm-leaf-manuscripts/

http://library.ifla.org/2266/1/124-cabral-en.pdf

https://www.ifla.org/wp-content/uploads/files/assets/pac/Documents/pac_sri_lanka_report_best_practices_for_conservation_of_palm-leaf_manuscripts_.pdf

BY KAMALIKA PIERIS